Science and Religion Finally Stop Pulling Each Other's Hair on the Playground.

I'm fairly well proud of the Catholic Church right this second. Yesterday Pope Francis made a statement that Evolution and the Big Bang were consistent with the doctrine that the Lord created the world and humankind. The Pope finally said what Mormons have been saying for years and years and years - science and religion are not at odds with each other.

It's funny, though. When religion is involved (and not just conservative Christianity - pretty much any religious belief counts for this), it takes SO MUCH longer to change ideas that are wrong. That, of course, has its pros and cons.

Pro: Religious adherents are less susceptible to social fads and trends, especially when those trends go against their religious beliefs.

Con: Religious adherents get stuck in fads and trends that their religion adopted 150 years ago.

Pro: When a long held belief does change, there is ample irrefutable evidence for the fact, so beliefs are rarely changed mistakenly.

Con: It takes ample irrefutable evidence to change a wrong, long held belief.

It's funny, beliefs that God certainly didn't introduce into the church (like, for example, a geocentric solar system/universe) get used to teach true principles, and are heard so often that they become sacred. And then, when you present evidence to the contrary, the Spanish Inquisition comes around and starts yelling heresy.

Or the doctrine of "circles." That's one of my favorites. (I heard it from my astronomy professor, but I haven't been able to verify it via quick Google search. Hmmm... Anyway, if it's true, it's still a good example.) Early Christians adopted the Greek notion that circles were sacred, and when people started getting into astronomy they realized that everything moved in basically circular motions - in fact, from what they could see, entirely circular motions. Therefore, the heavens operated on this sacred concept of circles. Then Johannes Kepler comes along and says, "Actually, planets move in elliptical orbits. They're not perfect circles by any stretch of the imagination," and everybody freaks out. "NOOO! DON'T GET RID OF OUR CIRCLES!!!"

Now, as you would expect, Christianity had a rough time when science started threatening the literal interpretations of their mythology. There was a lot in Christian mythology that didn't go well with scientific observation. For example, the most famous conflict, God created the Earth in 7 days.

Now, I really doubt God is going to tell Moses - a man who needed to teach an ancient people with very little knowledge of physics and astronomy - something like, "And in the first billion years, I did direct the gravitational pulls of interstellar dust into a mass of hydrogen large enough to fuse into helium in the center. In order that I might provide adequate heat for the developing Earth, but not too much heat, I did divide out just enough hydrogen to make the sun slightly on the green side of yellow on the light spectrum. But, due to the scattering of particles by the atmosphere, the sun will appear completely yellow to your eyes. And I did direct the gravitational orbit of the Earth to be in what shall be known as the 'Goldilocks Zone' where it is not too hot, and not too cold. And then, later in the first billion years, I did cause planetary differentiation to occur, with the heavier elements sinking to the planet's core, and the lighter elements rising to the surface. And in the second billion years, I did cause simple organisms to develop the ability to photosynthesize, creating an abundance of oxygen through the conversion of carbon dioxide in their chloroplasts, thereby giving developing animal life the need to evolve in such a way that they will use oxygen to their benefit."

Et cetera.


Imagine Moses trying to explain that to the children of Israel. They'd be like, "Um... This is really complicated. Can we just worship our calf now?"

So yes, 3500 years ago, we got a creation mythology. It was pretty simple. "On the first day, I said, 'Let there be light,' and there was light."

And frankly, that worked really well for three millennia. The Western World didn't really need a better explanation than that.

Then science started getting into the nitty gritty details (okay... the very basic details) of exactly how the world was created, and we as a general population became more educated and better able to understand the technicalities of planetary development. "God said it and it happened" wasn't really a good enough explanation anymore.

But, unfortunately...

"God doesn't need gravitational pulls! All He needs is the power of His word! This is heresy!!!"

(Point - nowhere in the Bible does it say that God didn't use gravity and basic principles of physics in the creation of the world. The fact that he did it with nothing more than a word and *poof!* is one of those incorrect doctrines previously mentioned.)

The church resisted scientific discovery to an intense degree during the period of the Spanish Inquisition. Galileo is the most famous scientist who got persecuted by the church for his (totally correct) beliefs, but he was - by far - not the only one. It established a pretty nasty precedent for science and religion being at odds with each other.

And, fortunately, in that battle - science won. Religion was forced to change its deeply held, incorrect beliefs about a lot of things.

The thing is, in my head, science and religion are completely compatible with each other. There were too many "coincidences" in the formation of the world for me to believe there wasn't some intelligent direction going on there, and I can't imagine God not using scientific principles when He designs a world. I've been saying it for years, and the majority of the Christians I've discussed it with totally agree.

But the Catholic Church has been really hesitant to say anything against those traditional views. Emperor Palpati... um... I mean... Pope Benedict XVI made some statements that felt like grudgingly acknowledging the scientific explanation might have some merit, while simultaneously saying, "But they could still be wrong!" Then yesterday happened. Pope Francis acknowledged that the Big Bang and Evolution were completely compatible with the Christian view of the Creation, and the two actually went hand in hand.

So, thank you, Catholic Church, for that concession. Science and religion don't need to be at odds with each other - they compliment each other quite nicely. Religion just ... well... needs to redefine some of their doctrines without as much kicking and screaming. Use science - don't fight it. And also, science, stop calling religion stupid. It's not remotely stupid, and if you two can't get along, you'll be in timeout for the rest of the century.

Oh, but religion? Stay away from those social trends and fads. Those are trouble.

Reason #483 Why I Need Kids

I love Halloween. 

Well... minus the part where people saturate the world with pictures of spiders. Come on, people! There are so many options. Why spiders???

But, I've always loved the traditions that go along with it, especially the part where you dress up in the most ridiculous and/or creative and/or fangirliest outfit you can concoct, and go door to door gathering enough candy to make Willy Wonka vomit. 

I trick-or-treated until I was 18 or 19 and my dad started giving me crap about being too old for it. But honestly, I didn't consider myself too old. I still thoroughly enjoyed every moment of it, and could see no reason why I should stop enjoying myself. Besides, at the age of 18 I still looked like a 12 or 13 year old, and on top of that, I was accompanying my 11 and 14 year old brothers, which made me look even younger. Nobody had to know! 

But, I caved to the peer pressure. Some time around or before my 20th birthday, I gave up on the glorious institution that is trick-or-treating. 

It was a devastating loss. As I went to college, Halloween was nothing more than parties that weren't based around candy and therefore not fun, & church dances where I was usually ready to go home after 30 minutes of not having anyone to dance with. I did enjoy dressing up, and I did quite a lot of that, but I still wished the kids in student housing would figure out what life was really about and keep bowls of candy in their apartments for me to come raid. 

And somehow, buying all the 50% off candy on November 1st, while a great deal on individually wrapped diabetes, just wasn't the same. 

Last year I got to spend Halloween with kids again. I was home to help my mom with her surgery, and two of my nieces were there. I went with them to the church trunk-or-treat activity, where I handed out candy to swarms of hyperactive ninjas, Avengers, princesses, and Batmen. It was a LOT of fun, and as I watched the kids assault my candy bowl with vigor and enthusiasm, I told myself I was happy in my new role. I could do nothing more than hand out candy and be perfectly content. 

And that was a blatant lie to myself. Yes, I could hand out candy and enjoy myself, but truth be told, I want to be out there on the streets, gathering the booty and bringing home my spoils. 

The instant I have a baby, I don't care if he or she is 3 weeks old, we are spending baby's first Halloween trick-or-treating. I will dress my mini-me up in the cutest baby costume I can concoct - so cute no one will DARE to ask, "Aren't you a little young for trick-or-treating?" - and I will hit up all the good houses, loading up my bucket of candy for that baby. 

And, of course, there's only one way for a nursing baby to eat candy...

*sigh*

Some day. 

Halloween was not made for adults.